Andy Lyons | Getty Images
INDIANAPOLIS – Readers of 1070TheFan.com can submit their questions to have a chance of them being answered in our mailbag.
Submit your questions here.
Here is the collection of Friday questions:
Justin (Treynor, IA)
Which would be better for the Colts? Squeaking into the playoffs this year and losing in the first round, or missing the playoffs again but getting a better draft pick
Bowen: It’s a good question, Justin. I can definitely listen to both sides of the equation. Some would say you always take a playoff berth, especially with a quarterback like Andrew Luck, because you just never know what can happen. I would probably go with the draft pick route though. You need to continue to balance out this roster and build depth, something that’s being tested right now late in the season. For sustained success, I think it’s more important to benefit from higher draft picks for another season. A season of 7 or 8 wins, and falling just short of the playoffs would/should still be considered a success and a nice step forward in this three-year rebuild. I just don’t think this team is talented enough, from 1-to-53, to compete for Super Bowls year in and year out right now.
George (Columbus, IN)
With the Colts dropping this past game to the Jaguars, will they need to win out to have a realistic shot of making the playoffs?
Bowen: In my opinion, yes. You put the phrase ‘realistic shot’ in there and that’s why I say you need to win out. A loss, especially one on Sunday, would all but eliminate the Colts (6-6) from contention. It would officially end their AFC South chances and would really hurt their Wild Card hopes with the conference record tiebreaker being so involved. With Baltimore at 7-5, the Titans now at 7-6 and teams like Denver and Miami at 6-6 (and with some really favorable schedules for the Broncos and Titans), that’s why I point to the need to probably win out to have a decent chance at the playoffs. You would need so much help if you lost one more game this season. It could happen, but it’s unlikely.
Kimberly (Marion, IN)
Defensively, what position do you think our weakest link is? With the front 7-7th in NFL in YPC . Sheard, Autry, and Hunt playing well. Also think Leonard and Walker are our linebackers of the future. I think Wilson/Moore have been much improved as of late. I think we need a premiere DE Rusher. Or an upgrade to Geathers. Your thoughts?
Bowen: I would agree with the need for a premier defensive end rusher, or even a disruptive three technique at defensive tackle (or both). Creating interior pressure seems to be more and more of a 2018 need for today’s NFL. I could see a possible upgrade for Geathers and you definitely could use a few more bodies at corner. But I come back to the individual pass rush, particularly off the edge, as my biggest need moving forward.
Andrew (Philadelphia)
How would Ballard, Reich, and Eberflus rank the importance of positions for our respective schemes? For instance, our defense doesn’t seem to place as much value on lockdown corner play while our offense really values TE2. Thanks, Kevin
Bowen: Hmm, this is a good question Andrew. You point to a good example of the definite No. 1/press man corner versus a No. 2 tight end. For Ballard, it seems like corner or a second wide receiver aren’t necessarily held in that high of need. But the trenches are a definite thing he covets. On offense, I think Reich is really going to hold skill positions at a higher level than the trenches going forward. I think he believes his scheme can make up for any deficiency in offensive line talent. For Eberflus, I fall back on the need to improve the defensive front because he wants to rush 4 and drop 7. That would mean cornerback isn’t as big of a need.
David (Indianapolis)
It feels more and more likely every day that Darren Collison’s time with the Pacers isn’t lasting past this season do to the emergence of Holiday. Do you think the Pacers are going to keep Collison through the end of this season, or is it possible that he ends up on the block as we get closer to the trade deadline?
Bowen: Well, well, well, David. I believe you sent this question in during the Chicago game on Tuesday night, as Collison was going off for 23 points and 8 rebounds, in his best game of the season. Not great timing, but you do bring up a question that I think deserves to be asked. Collison has largely been inconsistent through the first 24 games of the season. Having said that, I don’t think the Pacers will part ways with Collison before the season ends. Kevin Pritchard really wants to keep this group together and I still think Collison is key for a team that wouldn’t really get much value in return if they decided to trade him come January/February. I do think Aaron Holiday has a definite future, but the rookie is still a rookie. His turnover propensity and streaky jump shot are not something I see the Pacers ready to rely on, in a consistent every night role, just yet.
Yash (Denver)
My questions about Malik hooker, do you feel like he’s been underperforming or has been hurt this season? He showed flashes of awesome at the beginning of last year, and I just feel like it’s been lacking this year. What are your thoughts? Thanks as always, I’ll hang up and listen – YT
Bowen: This is a popular question right now. Before I get into my thoughts on Hooker, make sure to check out how Matt Eberflus described Hooker’s game from this past Sunday. In my opinion, I don’t know if this scheme is a great fit for Hooker and his playmaking nature. We really haven’t seen a whole bunch of opportunities for Hooker this season. Now, some would argue that Hooker should be seeking out and finding such plays on his own. But Eberflus makes it clear that Hooker’s job is not to get beat deep (the Colts have done a good job of limiting big plays in 2018) and to not allow chunk run plays. So, when teams are content with dinking and dunking against this Tampa 2 defense, the question is there if Hooker’s impact can really be felt? It certainly isn’t being totally felt on the stat sheet. Chris Ballard believes Hooker is on his way to being back to his normal self after the October 2017 ACL injury. I believe for this defense to take that necessary jump, they will eventually need for Hooker to ascend to a Pro Bowl level. I think a mix of scheme fit and still battling a few physical things are the reasons Hooker hasn’t been the same player we saw early in his rookie season.
Cayden (Sioux Falls, SD)
Hey Kevin! Big fan of yours and your time with colts website. My question is do you like the idea of taking a WR in the first or second round of the draft in 2019? There are some good prospects especially the one from Ole Miss. It’s obvious T.Y has been targeted by opposing defenses due to the colts not having that big body receiver we had in Moncrief and Wayne to compliment Hilton’s speed. Andrew Luck can take this team places if he had an open T.Y as he has in the past especially with the amazing O-line and Ebron being the Tight End threat we always wanted from Fleener but never got.
Bowen: Appreciate the kind words, Cayden. Means a lot. Glad you found the content on 1070TheFan.com. With receiver, I think I would be all aboard the wideout train in Round 1 or Round 2. It’s probably more so in Round 2 for me, with the Colts having two selections in that round (one from the Jets and one being the Colts). This wideout class in 2019 is not supposed to be very deep though, so that’s another reason why I would lean towards the second round. Find a bigger body target to first complement T.Y. Hilton, who could possibly take over that No. 1 role down the road. Remember, Hilton is 29 years old so the future at that position cannot be ignored.
Jesse (Jasper, IN)
The 2018 offensive line has taken a complete 180 from 2017’s o-line. Whether it’s from schemes, coaching, off season personal changes, or probably all of the above. The line is so much stronger and seems to define our offense. My question is, what position group do we need to make the same type of jump in 2019 for us to be really competitive? Thanks!
Bowen: Thanks for chiming in again, Jesse. A trio of positions immediately come to mind: defensive line, cornerback and wide receiver. I’m not sure on the exact order or the rank in importance, both those positions need bolstering. Nothing certainly compares to how much the offensive line needed attention/improvement last offseason. That’s obviously a good thing.
Oz (New York City)
Thoughts on a new defensive scheme? I think Matt has done a great job, but last game showed that opponents can dink-and-dunk their way down the field with screens and such. I was thinking about something along the lines of Cover 2 Press. We could have Hooker deep, Quincy and Pierre out wide and Kenny/Nate in the slot. This way the QBs hold the ball more and our DL has more time to get to him. I think we have the talent to have a solid defense, but just aren’t matching the scheme to the players. Hooker needs more deep passes, Quincy can’t play zone, Kenny can but would be a talented slot anyway, and our DL can no longer stunt their way to the QB. Thoughts?
Bowen: We received this question a few weeks back and it still has plenty of relevance now. There are many questions about this scheme being sophisticated enough to survive a 16-game schedule. Some of the biggest gripes about this new scheme comes from the underneath yardage that we see given up. Matt Eberflus is very content with the ‘no coverage zone’ up to 5 yards from the line of scrimmage. I’m with you in seeing more Cover 2 Press. That makes a lot of sense to me in trying to disrupt the timing for opposing QBs/WRs, especially when your pass rush isn’t consistently getting home. I do think the scheme could be more complex. An upgrade in personnel will without a doubt help this defense, but using a variety of looks and coverages wouldn’t hurt either.
Leonardo (Rio de Janeiro)
Hi, Kevin. Before last season, I’ve seen a bunch of analysts saying that D-Line was perhaps the most deep group Colts had. Now, I’ve seen some people picking D-Line as one of the top-3 needs for Colts next offseason. Two questions: do you agree with it? And how much of this is due to 4-3 change, the loss of important players like Anderson and Hankins or maybe the lack of pass rush? Regards.
Bowen: 1. Yes, I definitely agree that the defensive line is a major priority for the Colts in 2019. And I also think the group had a pretty good amount of quality depth across the unit. But this scheme needs some elite playmakers up front and not just depth. 2. Scheme change played into things for sure, but I still don’t think the 3-4 had tremendous edge presences by any means. Hankins and Anderson were effective players, but still not the scary pass rushers like you see other teams possess off the edge.
